Complain if the government doesn't listen, complain if it does. Complain if it uses fad technologies, complain that it's in the dark ages. Complain that it's too big, complain that it doesn't do enough. Complain that taxes are too high...well, there's seldom heard a counterpoint to that one.
He has a hobby. It's politics. It's not your hobby. Whoop-de-doo. Why does that give you justification to mock him? You'd think someone on slashdot could relate to having unconventional hobbies. Actually no, I would not think that because a complete lack of self-awareness is entirely typical.
By "social networking" I assumed it meant talking to the other humans around you. A terrifying prospect. I'm relieved to see it's only make-believe socialization through the protective glowing screen.
The biggest impediment to medical advances in the US is not malpractice suits but companies that develop a new technology, patent it, then throw it in a vault because it wouldn't be as profitable as whatever they currently have on the market. A marketing spokesman once bragged to me about this practice. His company made dialysis machines among other things. I don't think I've ever been as mad about anything in my life.
Then they shouldn't be getting paid. I'm old enough to remember when businesses cared about keeping the customer happy. Now it's all about lower prices and cutting costs. Do they not teach "win with price, lose with price" in not-being-a-dumbass-at-business 101 anymore?
You make a good point. Allowing undesirables to live would impede progress toward the master race. But limiting it only to "the fat, lazy, and stupid" is not efficient enough. Those with disabilities that require maintenance care should also be culled to keep costs down. As well as those with latent inadequacies discovered by genetic testing. Really, the cheapest and most efficient method for lowering health care costs would be if everyone else just hurried up and died. Damn those bastards who insist on wanting to live despite the intolerable crime of not being me.
However, I can equally assure you that the Teacher's Union is so high on itself that it wouldn't allow having a non-teacher teaching anything, let alone other teachers. There is this underlying current of elitism in many teachers. In what universe are people living where teacher's unions are so powerful? It sure isn't this one. Most states have outlawed teacher strikes which removes their only leverage--period.
In the case of the elderly, it's not that they're unable to learn how to use computers... it's just that they're scared to. Or too stubborn. "I lived fifty years without knowing this and I shouldn't have to learn it now."
Since when did the leader of a country threatening to wipe an ally of the United States off the map not constitute a real threat? Ahmadinejad is not the leader of Iran. He is the President of Iran, a figurehead position, with all real power belonging to Supreme Leader Khamenei. I would think with a title like that people could keep straight just who holds authority in that country. Appearently not.
Ahmadinejad's not even very popular within Iran, his party having lost some power in their most recent election.
For myself, I'm rather confused as to why these people would be so upset at the idea of a privatized GI Joe force, and instead seem to prefer him/it as an arm of the government they clearly hate so much.
Then again, I guess if they were capable of sense they wouldn't be such nut-balls in the first place.
They were teaching to the student because it is simply a fact that not every student can be molded into "well-rounded individuals prepared for the next stage of the adventure of life," with or without state tests, regardless of teacher quality. Hell, most people on the face of the Earth cannot be made into "well-rounded individuals prepared for the next stage of the adventure of life." That's a setup for total education failure because while you're chasing every last straggler the students with real potential are held back. That's what the FCAT and tests like it cause. I'll tell you what teaching to the test means. It means that when you have a good Math teacher and a bad English teacher, it forces the Math teacher to teach English in their Math class because getting ahead in Math does not help with the FCAT but falling behind on English does hurt on the FCAT.
Which is true for good teachers, but you still need an objective way to evaluate who those good teachers are.
Another impossible goal. No one can objectively differentiate between a teacher's skill and their student's ability to learn the material. No one can objectively separate a teacher's quality from the quality of the teaching environment. No one can objectively differentiate between a teacher's skill and the parents' attentiveness. Not to mention that not everyone learns the same way so what teacher is perfect for one student may not be for another.
Holding schools and by extension teachers "accountable" when they are constantly fighting to overcome obstructions that they have no power over--student's innate ability, environment, parents--only serves to shrink the already minuscule pool of available teaching talent because the better someone is the more likely they are to resent being blamed for something they can't control and the more likely they are to find better work elsewhere, and there are a lot of places better than a public school.
Also, now is as good a place as any to point out the irony in that the people usually most opposed to "big government" are also the ones most in favor of ceding local control of schools to far away governments and bureaucracies that have their own interests in mind, not the students. Just an observation. Incidentally, that sort of thing also strengthens teacher's unions because when it's a far away entity making the decisions about what gets taught in the classroom, teachers can no longer argue a case themselves, e.g. to use a particular textbook, and must resort to relying on a union rep in the capital.
In summary, standardized testing is making things worse.
The FCAT was never intended as a way to measure student's success. Or teacher's success, if you want to go there. It's a political football. In Jeb Bush's last year as governor, the FCAT standards were lowered dramatically so that he could point to the higher passing rate as a measure of his success on education. The students never get better with this test, the standards are simply adjusted to whatever outcome the powers that be want.
I'm not upset because BP got permission. I'm upset because (1) I think they bought the permission with bribes, (2) that it's permission to do something that will help 80 people plus some shareholders, ignoring the other 34 million people (as of 2000's census) living in the states surrounding that lake, and (3) I think it's just plain wrong. That the federal limit is so high says more about that limit's wrongness than BP's rightness. Also, comparing urine to industrial waste is a stretch. And by "stretch" I mean laughably dishonest.
Is it just me, or is the phrase "politically incorrect" little more than a marketing tool these days? An effortless way to assert you're speaking the truths "they" don't want anyone to know.
Slashdot Mirror
Treasure is only half the cost of war. Blood is the other half. How willing are you to pay that price from your own accounts?
Were you trusting in the usual slashdot habit of not reading the article? There's nothing in there about either welfare or the first of the month.
Postfix.
I wasn't aware bullets' effectiveness was relative to a country's GDP. I guess that explains the US's higher crime rate too.
Complain if the government doesn't listen, complain if it does. Complain if it uses fad technologies, complain that it's in the dark ages. Complain that it's too big, complain that it doesn't do enough. Complain that taxes are too high...well, there's seldom heard a counterpoint to that one.
God Bless America, and no place else.
He has a hobby. It's politics. It's not your hobby. Whoop-de-doo. Why does that give you justification to mock him? You'd think someone on slashdot could relate to having unconventional hobbies. Actually no, I would not think that because a complete lack of self-awareness is entirely typical.
By "social networking" I assumed it meant talking to the other humans around you. A terrifying prospect. I'm relieved to see it's only make-believe socialization through the protective glowing screen.
The biggest impediment to medical advances in the US is not malpractice suits but companies that develop a new technology, patent it, then throw it in a vault because it wouldn't be as profitable as whatever they currently have on the market. A marketing spokesman once bragged to me about this practice. His company made dialysis machines among other things. I don't think I've ever been as mad about anything in my life.
The amount by which someone is "just another politician" is inversely proportional to how often they do what I want.
A patent!? Burn the heretic!1! (Sure it makes no sense in context. I think that makes it more appropriate.)
A bit bold of you to declare the current recession technically over when it hasn't even technically (i.e. retroactively) begun.
You make a good point. Allowing undesirables to live would impede progress toward the master race. But limiting it only to "the fat, lazy, and stupid" is not efficient enough. Those with disabilities that require maintenance care should also be culled to keep costs down. As well as those with latent inadequacies discovered by genetic testing. Really, the cheapest and most efficient method for lowering health care costs would be if everyone else just hurried up and died. Damn those bastards who insist on wanting to live despite the intolerable crime of not being me.
Your reasoning assumes people always act rationally about sex. Something there is more than sufficient evidence to disprove.
Because there is no crime like a "peon" thinking for himself.
For myself, I'm rather confused as to why these people would be so upset at the idea of a privatized GI Joe force, and instead seem to prefer him/it as an arm of the government they clearly hate so much. Then again, I guess if they were capable of sense they wouldn't be such nut-balls in the first place.
Holding schools and by extension teachers "accountable" when they are constantly fighting to overcome obstructions that they have no power over--student's innate ability, environment, parents--only serves to shrink the already minuscule pool of available teaching talent because the better someone is the more likely they are to resent being blamed for something they can't control and the more likely they are to find better work elsewhere, and there are a lot of places better than a public school.
Also, now is as good a place as any to point out the irony in that the people usually most opposed to "big government" are also the ones most in favor of ceding local control of schools to far away governments and bureaucracies that have their own interests in mind, not the students. Just an observation. Incidentally, that sort of thing also strengthens teacher's unions because when it's a far away entity making the decisions about what gets taught in the classroom, teachers can no longer argue a case themselves, e.g. to use a particular textbook, and must resort to relying on a union rep in the capital.
In summary, standardized testing is making things worse.
The FCAT was never intended as a way to measure student's success. Or teacher's success, if you want to go there. It's a political football. In Jeb Bush's last year as governor, the FCAT standards were lowered dramatically so that he could point to the higher passing rate as a measure of his success on education. The students never get better with this test, the standards are simply adjusted to whatever outcome the powers that be want.
No one's forcing you to drive. Vote with your feet. //libertarian irrationalization
I'm not upset because BP got permission. I'm upset because (1) I think they bought the permission with bribes, (2) that it's permission to do something that will help 80 people plus some shareholders, ignoring the other 34 million people (as of 2000's census) living in the states surrounding that lake, and (3) I think it's just plain wrong. That the federal limit is so high says more about that limit's wrongness than BP's rightness. Also, comparing urine to industrial waste is a stretch. And by "stretch" I mean laughably dishonest.
Is it just me, or is the phrase "politically incorrect" little more than a marketing tool these days? An effortless way to assert you're speaking the truths "they" don't want anyone to know.